eso es lo que venimos diciendo sobre que el arsenal nuclear ruso igual no está funcional (salvo alguna cosa, y a saber cómo)
echa cuentas, sobre el ciclo de vida "soviético" de las ojivas (rotaban cada 3 años:
The Soviet Union's deployment cycle was to put warheads onto systems for three years, before downloading them and sending them to the factory to be refurbished.
According to the old Cold War Era FEMA hands, this meant the best 1/3 of nukes were on missiles, subs & bombers.
luego tenían una reserva estratégica y un "almacén" tipo desguace (pa piezas y tal)
The next 1/3 of 'reduced reliability' were in 'reserves' for ICBM/SLBM/Bomber reloads. The last 1/3 were not trusted to work awaited their turn to be 'recooked'
The Soviets cold launched their liquid fueled missiles so they could reload silos with high fueling cycle missiles
y luego pasa esto:
Additionally, the Tritium which is used for nuclear fusion, has a half-life of 12.3 years.
echa cuentas desde 1992 (y la cosa estaba peluda ya entonces) y tienes casi 3 ciclos de decaimiento, o sea, al menos tienes un 25% del tritio original en cada ojiva (no-mantenida)
añades silos oxidados y corruptelas putinescas y...
muy largo lo fia el trent, mirad
I think we can place Russian Federation nukes into quarters.
o 1/4 Fully operational
o 1/4 primary detonations of 5-7 kt without fusion or secondary fission
o 1/4 'fizzles' that have incomplete fission
o 1/4 complete duds
eso son aprox 1000 ojivas funcionales, 1000 petardos de feria y 2000 que ni salen del silo o caen sin explotar
muchas funcionales me parecen, porque él estima que mantenerlas funcionales cuesta 10 millones $ al año, y eso equivale a un 25% del presupuesto militar ruso (estima que son 40 mil millones tal presupuesto)
y luego esto
This would be a game of pushing the Russian "Reflexive Control Theory" infowar stratagem right back down the Oligarch's collective throats.
If no one in Russia is sure their nukes work.
